My boss was not really interested in open-source in the past. It was always okay, if we used a library or framework that developers had come at no cost. But he was not interested in the details.
But some customers talked about open-source and therefore they got the idea that such a thing exists. Recently he surprised us because he wanted to talk about open source and open source strategy for our company.
So they told us about a system for our software license in the future. This system included registration for download and no one was allowed to give code to third party and in fact no one would allow the code to be changed without our permission. That's why I said that it is okay, but there is no open source and he was a little unhappy about that.
The problem was that he had no information in fact, what is the open source, how would you explain the concept of open source to your boss?
EDIT: I think that there is a real problem in understanding my boss, that a community of developers without lead a company as strong as I see it Thinks that people working on a personal level can not make some useful software. As a result, they believe Apache webservers and Linux were products by the Sun. And he looked confused, as I explained that I can get code from Apache webserver, change some bits and release this converted web server as my product (with other words: making a fork) .
I'm sure he does not really want to release open source, but he does not understand the idea about it, so I search for a way to explain it.
It seems that your boss describes source license to your customers It was definitely worth it, because this customer can assure that the code is high quality they can do their own code inspection, security auditing, etc.
It may also be an option to insert source code in escrow . Some companies keep a copy of their code with a third party, so if your company becomes bankrupt And disappears, then the customer has some access to the code, so that they can maintain the event. The agreement between your company and the customer should include a section for it. If you provide a source license to the customer, you can terminate the third-party escrow service. You are only involved in this agreement if your company evaporates, then the customer has an exclusive license to use and modify your code.
Open-source is different, as you publish it in that all , a non-specific license to use and modify your code. Your company is healthy during this time, users must adhere to the terms of the licensing of the course, which can add conditions for use. For example, GPL says that any customer's modifications should also be made available under a corresponding license. BSD, on the other hand, is not required for this.
Open Source Not Required means Free You can charge for codes, even if it remains open source. Even GPL permits this. But this is a legitimate question, how can you control or enforce the license if the code is open source?
The best solution is that your business value is service or access , instead of just code, if the customer is in a news feed If you are paying, why not create a software that displays news open source? In that business, you probably want to distribute software widely for free, because it will be more wooing people to subscribe to your service.
Comments
Post a Comment